United States v. Beede’s Empirical Analysis
974 F.2d 948 · 1992
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently May 2020 · most notably United States v. Benitez (1994), United States v. Rodgers (1994)
24 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2 · 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (§ 101 of the Speedy Trial Act of 1974) · 18 U.S.C. § 924 · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 843 (§ 403 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Bordenkircher v. Hayes · United States v. Goodwin · Padilla-Martinez v. United States · Hughey v. United States · Yamamoto v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The fact that the federal government prosecutes a federal crime in a federal court that could or has been prosecuted as a state crime in state court does not itself violate due process.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We have stated that “[a] defendant may demonstrate prosecutorial vindictiveness in two ways.” United States v. Beede, 974 F.2d 948, 951 (8th Cir.1992). “First, a defendant may prove through objective evidence that the prosecutor’s decision was intended to punish him or her for the exercise of a legal right.” Id. (citing [United States v.] Goodwin, 457 U.S. [368,] 384 n. 19, 102 S.Ct. 2485 [, 73 L.Ed.2d 74 (1982) ]). “Second, a defendant may in certain circumstances rely on a presumption of vindictiveness.” Id.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.